Michele Bachmann, GOP congresswoman and self-proclaimed gaffe-free presidential candidate, took to the subject of gay marriage in an event she attended on Wednesday. She was asked a number of questions by Jane Schmidt, a high school student at Waverly High School and president of the Gay-Straight Alliance.
When asked by Schmidt what she would do to support the LGBT community, Bachmann responded by saying that she would follow the government's role in protecting the civil rights of all Americans, saying, "There shouldn't be any special rights or special set of criteria based upon people's preferences. We all have the same civil rights." Schmidt pressed on, asking why, then, could same-sex couples not marry. Bachmann said it was fine if they did, as long as they married a person of the opposite sex.
Schmidt rightly pointed out that this implied that heterosexual couples have privilege. Bachmann replied that there is no right to same-sex marriage, but this doesn't deny her point. If civil rights extend only to people of a certain sexual preference, then those rights are putting people in that category above others, essentially granting them the special privilege that Bachmann would so readily deny to homosexual couples wishing to marry.
Bachmann went on to say, "I said that there are no special rights for people based upon your sex practices. There's no special rights based upon what you do in your sex life." This argument destroys itself because she is ignoring the fact that couples consisting of one man and one woman are granted the right to marry while other couples are not because of their sex practices. If that weren't the case, no doubt we wouldn't see any of the arguments that gay couples are unnatural, immoral and other vile rhetoric.
Opponents of gay marriage have brought up a variety of arguments: it's immoral, it would teach kids that being gay is okay, it would lead to bestiality and molestation, gay couples can't have kids (because adoption is impossible and because the Earth has such a shortage of humans) and other things. They also say that straight marriage is "normal," attempting to interchange the definitions of "normal" and "common."
However, the idea that gay marriage isn't allowed because it would be some special privilege is another new ridiculous argument to bring to the table. Many have heard of the spooky "homosexual agenda" that sounds like some apocalyptic plot for world domination. This fear-mongering and demonizing of a natural part of life (which many will deny because science is frightening like that) belittles the efforts of normal people simply wishing to live a normal life. Wishing for marriage equality isn't asking for special rights. It's asking for the same rights. That homosexuals are still fighting for the rights to marry the one they love in this day and age is a scary example of how slow human progression can really be.
However, Bachmann's idea of the law of the land is fading. Six states already grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and more will undoubtedly follow the same process.